Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Changing identities may change a winning culture - but that's not the point

The Crusaders huddle at AMI Stadium in front of old decor. (Photo by Kai Schwoerer/Getty Images)

Some things are bigger than sports.

That certainly seems to be the message that New Zealand Rugby chief executive Steve Tew wants to deliver to the country when it comes to the horrific terrorist attack that took place in Christchurch last month.

ADVERTISEMENT

New Zealand Rugby has acknowledged that the Crusaders name and identity is one that may be considered offensive to members of the wider community, given the associations the name has with some of the atrocities and crimes that were committed during medieval times.

That mass shooting that occurred on 15 March was ostensibly driven by religious and racial bigotry, it was an attack on the Muslim community. Understandably, New Zealand has almost overnight become more sensitive to other aspects of society with prejudicial undertones which have, until this point in time, been somewhat overlooked.

At the Crusaders’ upcoming home match, the normally ever-present sword-wielding horsemen will be absent – a move by management to ensure that nothing considered potentially in bad taste should blight the event.

Tew’s latest comments indicate that this absence could likely become permanent.

“We are asking (research and insights company) Research First to look into two possible options moving forward – retaining the ‘Crusaders’ name but changing the branding and associated imagery; or undertaking a complete rebranding, including the name and all imagery.” Tew confirmed earlier today.

“Maintaining the status quo in terms of the Crusaders name along with the current imagery of knights on horseback is, in our view, no longer tenable because of the association with the religious Crusades that has now been drawn. That is therefore not one of the options that we will be considering.”

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bvxm4sfAEqh/

Whilst the importance of remaining sensitive to the wider community’s views on the matter cannot be understated, it will be intensely interesting to see how the Crusaders team reacts on the pitch to the latest revelations.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Crusaders moniker has existed for 23 years now. Although older rugby fans may still identify more with their provincial teams, almost a whole generation of passionate supporters and players have grown up supporting the Crusaders franchise.

On a global level, the Crusaders may well be the most successful non-international rugby team in the world. In 23 years of Super Rugby competitions, the Crusaders have missed out on making the playoffs a mere three times. They’ve won the competition nine times – six more than their next closest rivals, the Blues and the Bulls. The sheer success of the Crusaders can simply not be exaggerated – they are an incredible team shaped by 23 years of history.

Whichever option the Crusaders and New Zealand Rugby boards opt for, we are going to see a huge shakeup at the Crusaders.

It must be made clear here that we’re not simply talking about modifying a team logo, we’re talking about completely changing a team’s identity.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Crusaders have been built on a culture of success – winning is in their blood. It’s this winning culture combined with an absolute commitment to their brand that makes the Crusaders who they are.

Head to a match at AMI Stadium and you’ll be greeted with the spectacular turrets of a castle jutting out from the corner of the ground, men on horseback charging up and down the sidelines and Vangelis’ ‘Conquest of Paradise’ blasting from the speakers – if there’s one team in New Zealand that absolutely owns their branding, it’s the Crusaders.

If a complete rebranding is to take place, then will this Crusaders side be able to maintain its winning ways? It may sound ridiculous to some that a name or identity change could have an impact on results moving forwards, but losing an identity shaped meticulously around success could very well leave the Crusaders in somewhat of a rut.

It’s as much about how other teams see the Crusaders as it is about the Crusaders players see themselves. Travelling to Christchurch to play the Crusaders has always been a frightening task, even in some of the more recent seasons when the Crusaders weren’t quite the unstoppable force they had once been (and have since returned to). Will the new team name continue to instil fear in the hearts of opposition?

A large contingent of Crusaders players may remain next year when any rebranding is to come in to play, even after the World Cup exodus, but we’ve seen in the past that sometimes good teams with great coaches can still fall short, simply due to mental hurdles.

In 2013 the Highlanders had one of the best teams in the competition and a much-respected coach in the form of Jamie Joseph, but that didn’t stop the franchise from finishing 14th in the competition. Only two years later the Highlanders bounced back (with much of the same squad and the same coach) to become champions. Sometimes there are more factors at play in how a team performs than just the team itself.

At present, the Crusaders are the best performing squad in Super Rugby – and they have been for the better part of the last two decades. Take away the name, take away the identity, and that ingrained winning culture may well go with it.

At the end of the day, if a change has to be made then so be it. This is bigger than rugby and sometimes sports has to take the back seat to more important things in the world. However, just because a change is necessary, it doesn’t mean the team will be able to continue on as it has in the past.

If any team in Super Rugby can overcome and rebuild after great tragedy then it is the Crusaders, but let’s not pretend that losing the identity they have built over the last 23 years won’t have an impact on their future results.

Highlanders lock Tom Franklin talks to the media:

Video Spacer
ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 6 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

145 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING How the Black Ferns Sevens reacted to Michaela Blyde's code switch Michaela Blyde's NRLW move takes team by surprise
Search